I suppose my public expect me to comment on this, the first salvo in the propaganda bombardment we can expect from the big guns between now and CILIP's AGM on 21 September. It is a YouTube video of a man in a pink shirt, reading nervously from a script on an iPad in a bathroom.
Watch it, though I take no responsibility for the consequences.
As for what he has to say:
- without any disrespect to Mr Du Bois (and why doesn't Mr Spencer appear), could they not find an elected member of Council to make the case for the name change? This seems unfair, both to CILIP members and to the consultants themselves
- the 6 minutes and 6 seconds are largely free of evidence for a change of name; the closest we get to it is a selective reference to the survey, a survey profoundly methodologically flawed, as has been pointed out in detail
- CILIP members are grown-up professionals. We don't need the Rebranding for Dummies lecture, especially for a rebranding exercise as flawed as this one
- 'we were right but not quite', he says. Hmm.
There's been lots more on Twitter. I give you Charles Oppenheim's four-tweet critique
The video for #CILIPrebrand is by a non-LIS person who keeps referring to "we" and "us". By someone who has to keep checking his notes...— Charles Oppenheim (@CharlesOppenh) August 21, 2013
...by someone who thinks the name mustn't infringe copyright or patents - er, its Trade Marks, oh brand consultant! #CILIPRebrand ...— Charles Oppenheim (@CharlesOppenh) August 21, 2013
....and therefore doesn't know his own specialism, who also fails to acknowledge the huge weaknesses of the survey he ran. #CILIPRebrand— Charles Oppenheim (@CharlesOppenh) August 21, 2013
...in short, by someone who should not be taken seriously. #CILIPRebrand— Charles Oppenheim (@CharlesOppenh) August 21, 2013